Example sentences of "having [be] [vb pp] [adj] [prep] [noun sg] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Frederick Stebbing FCA of 30 Aldridge Rise , New Malden , Surrey having been found guilty of misconduct within the meaning of Bye-Law 76(a) in force at the material time and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he in the Crown Court on 24 July 1991 pleaded guilty to an offence of dealing in securities of a company as a prohibited person contrary to Section 1(2) of the Company Securities ( Insider Dealing ) Act 1985 was censured and ordered to pay £350 by way of costs . |
| 2 | Annachamy Ganesh Aiyer FCA of 9 Cardiff Road , Luton , Beds having been found guilty of misconduct within the meaning of Bye-law 76(a) in force at the material time and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Luton between 8 January 1991 and 21 June 1991 passed clients ' monies through his firm 's office account was reprimanded , fined £750 and ordered to pay £500 by way of costs . |
| 3 | Krishna Kumar Rawal ACA of 74A High Street , Wanstead , London having been found guilty of misconduct within the meaning of Bye-law 76(a) in force at the material time and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he at Ilford and Wanstead between 18 November 1987 and 1 April 1990 failed to account properly and promptly for monies held on behalf of a client and in that he at Wanstead between 18 November 1987 and 6 January 1992 failed to account properly and promptly to a client for interest received in respect of monies held on behalf of the said client and having been in breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( iv ) in that he at Wanstead between 3 December 1991 and 18 June 1992 failed to provide information required of him by the Investigation Committee in exercise of its powers under Bye-law 80(a) was reprimanded , fined £1,000 , ordered to take advice from the Professional Referrals Service and to pay £1,000 by way of costs . |
| 4 | Michael William Beecheno ( ACA ) of 2 Tummons Gardens , South Norwood Hill , London having been found guilty of misconduct within the meaning of Bye-law 76(a) in force at the material time and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that in London between 11 March 1991 and 14 March 1991 he improperly suggested that charges to his employers for temporary staff be increased and the additional sums be paid to him under the guise of consultancy fees was excluded from membership of the Institute and ordered to pay £500 by way of costs . |
| 5 | ( FCA ) of , having been found guilty of misconduct contrary to Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he in Cardiff between 26 March 1991 and 4 February 1992 purported to exercise a lien over the papers of his former client when he was not entitled to do so and having been guilty of a breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( ii ) in that he in Cardiff between 22 May 1991 and 4 February 1992 failed to deal properly and promptly with professional enquiries from Chartered Accountants in respect of the affairs of his former client and having been found guilty of a breach of Bye-law 76(a) ( iv ) in that he in Cardiff between 17 December 1991 and 4 February 1992 failed to provide information required of him by the Investigation Committee on 17 December 1991 in exercise of its powers under Bye-law 80(a) concerning the affairs of his former client was reprimanded , fined £750 and ordered to pay £l , 000 by way of costs . |
| 6 | ( FCA ) of having been found guilty of misconduct within the meaning of Bye-law 76(a) and liable to disciplinary action under Bye-law 76(a) ( i ) in that he in the Magistrates Court was convicted of eight offences of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of Value Added Tax contrary to Section 39(1) of the Value Added Tax Act 1983 was excluded from membership of the Institute and ordered to pay £250 by way of costs . |